Promoting public participation in reducing food waste: A large-scale multiple randomized controlled trial

IF 11 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.104022
Shiyan Jiang , Hong Chen , Jianqiang Zhang , Peng Shan , Wanqi Ma
{"title":"Promoting public participation in reducing food waste: A large-scale multiple randomized controlled trial","authors":"Shiyan Jiang ,&nbsp;Hong Chen ,&nbsp;Jianqiang Zhang ,&nbsp;Peng Shan ,&nbsp;Wanqi Ma","doi":"10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.104022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Interventions on consumers food waste behaviour are an effective way to reduce food waste as well as negative environmental impacts. Informational interventions dominate the current field interventions, while large-scale consequence and integrated interventions are less available. In this study, a 5-month long multiple randomized controlled trial was conducted on 2524 customers in the food service industry in China. The study used a propensity score matching method to evaluate the effects of single informational (instructive vs guilt vs coupled), financial (rewards vs penalties) interventions, and integrated interventions (informational and financial) on reducing food waste. Utilising the principles of the Persuasion Effect, Prospect Theory, Expected Utility Theory, and Level of Explanation Theory, it was found that the informational intervention resulted in a 23% (10.69g) reduction in food waste (Study 1). The high-intensity financial intervention reduced food waste by 43% (12.43g) (Study 2). The integrated intervention reduced 27.72g (27%) (Study 3). Also, the intervention revealed noteworthy distinctions among the cohorts of consumers regarding their gender, age, meal expenditure, and BMI. This study establishes the efficacy of informational intervention, identifies the most suitable type and intensity level of financial interventions, and presents an efficient form of integrated interventions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services","volume":"81 ","pages":"Article 104022"},"PeriodicalIF":11.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969698924003187","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interventions on consumers food waste behaviour are an effective way to reduce food waste as well as negative environmental impacts. Informational interventions dominate the current field interventions, while large-scale consequence and integrated interventions are less available. In this study, a 5-month long multiple randomized controlled trial was conducted on 2524 customers in the food service industry in China. The study used a propensity score matching method to evaluate the effects of single informational (instructive vs guilt vs coupled), financial (rewards vs penalties) interventions, and integrated interventions (informational and financial) on reducing food waste. Utilising the principles of the Persuasion Effect, Prospect Theory, Expected Utility Theory, and Level of Explanation Theory, it was found that the informational intervention resulted in a 23% (10.69g) reduction in food waste (Study 1). The high-intensity financial intervention reduced food waste by 43% (12.43g) (Study 2). The integrated intervention reduced 27.72g (27%) (Study 3). Also, the intervention revealed noteworthy distinctions among the cohorts of consumers regarding their gender, age, meal expenditure, and BMI. This study establishes the efficacy of informational intervention, identifies the most suitable type and intensity level of financial interventions, and presents an efficient form of integrated interventions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
促进公众参与减少食物浪费:大规模多重随机对照试验
对消费者的食物浪费行为进行干预,是减少食物浪费和负面环境影响的有效途径。在目前的实地干预中,信息干预占主导地位,而大规模的后果干预和综合干预则较少。本研究对中国餐饮业的 2524 名顾客进行了为期 5 个月的多重随机对照试验。研究采用倾向得分匹配法,评估了单一信息(指导与内疚与耦合)、经济(奖励与惩罚)干预和综合干预(信息与经济)对减少食物浪费的效果。利用说服效应、前景理论、预期效用理论和解释水平理论,研究发现,信息干预使食物浪费减少了 23%(10.69 克)(研究 1)。高强度财政干预使食物浪费减少了 43%(12.43 克)(研究 2)。综合干预措施减少了 27.72 克(27%)(研究 3)。此外,干预措施还揭示了消费者群体在性别、年龄、膳食支出和体重指数方面的显著差异。这项研究证实了信息干预的有效性,确定了最合适的财务干预类型和强度水平,并提出了一种有效的综合干预形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.40
自引率
14.40%
发文量
340
审稿时长
20 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services is a prominent publication that serves as a platform for international and interdisciplinary research and discussions in the constantly evolving fields of retailing and services studies. With a specific emphasis on consumer behavior and policy and managerial decisions, the journal aims to foster contributions from academics encompassing diverse disciplines. The primary areas covered by the journal are: Retailing and the sale of goods The provision of consumer services, including transportation, tourism, and leisure.
期刊最新文献
Customers’ reuse intention to autonomous delivery vehicles in terminal delivery service: A valence theory perspective We match! Building online brand engagement behaviours through emotional and rational processes From popularity to pitfalls: Diagnosing consumer issues and engineering solutions for an ink-inspired mobile theme system Retail consumers' conundrum: An in-depth qualitative study navigating the motivations and aversion of chatbots Bright and dark sides of green consumerism: An in-depth qualitative investigation in retailing context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1